Spike sorting biases and information loss in a detailed cortical model
Laquitaine, S.; Imbeni, M.; Tharayil, J.; Isbister, J. B.; Reimann, M. W.
Show abstract
Sorting action potentials (spikes) from extracellular recordings of large groups of connected neurons is essential to understanding brain function. Simulations with known spike times have driven significant advances in spike sorting, but present models do not account for neuronal heterogeneity and its effect on sorting accuracy. Here, we used a large-scale detailed cortical microcircuit model to simulate recordings, evaluate modern spike sorters, and link their performance to neuronal heterogeneity. We also exposed the network to various stimuli to investigate how sorting errors affect stimulus discrimination. Spike sorters successfully isolated about 10% of neurons within 50 {micro}m of the electrode shank. This undersampling had no impact on stimulus discrimination ability. However, sorting biases related to firing rate, spike extent, synaptic type, and layer reduced its discrimination ability by nearly half. These findings show realistic models are a complementary method to evaluate and improve spike sorting and, hence, improve our understanding of neural activity.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- A conserved code for anatomy: Neurons throughout the brain embed robust signatures of their anatomical location into spike trains. 97%
- Robust variability of grid cell properties within individual grid modules enhances encoding of local space 97%
- Subpopulations of neurons in lOFC encode previous and current rewards at time of choice 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Modulation of metastable ensemble dynamics explains the inverted-U relationship between tone discriminability and arousal in auditory cortex 96%
- Interpretable deep learning for deconvolutional analysis of neural signals 96%
- Metastable attractors explain the variable timing of stable behavioral action sequences 96%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.